Teacher Gesture and Lexical Focus on Form in a Foreign Language Classroom
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: This article explores the use of gesture by a French language teacher during lexical focus on form (FonF). The analysis compares pre-emptive FonF (before a problem in communication has occurred), and reactive FonF (after a problem has occurred) and looks at the differences between teacher-initiated and learner-initiated FonF in the use and type of gesture. Ten hours of classroom interaction in an intermediate, French as a foreign language course were video-recorded. Overall, 110 form-focused episodes (FEEs) were identified, half of them – verbs and collocations, in particular – accompanied by gestures. Results revealed that the initiator and the type of FonF (reactive vs. pre-emptive) may have influenced the number of gestures and the duration of the FFEs. Indeed, 91.6% of the learner-initiated versus 49% of the teacher-initiated FFEs were accompanied by gestures (iconics were the most used), and pre-emptive learner-initiated FFEs led, on average, to longer and more complex gestural explanations from the teacher.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".